reply |
|||
Line 106: | Line 106: | ||
--[[User:LVerina|LVerina]] ([[User talk:LVerina|talk]]) 01:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
--[[User:LVerina|LVerina]] ([[User talk:LVerina|talk]]) 01:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
||
:I suggest you read [[Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth]], particularly the section titled "But I know the truth!" and "Editors are not truth finders". She's recognized in the [[India Book of Records]] as the youngest web designer. While other sources may show examples of others who are younger, it's not for us as editors to [[WP:SYNTH|synthesize]] the truth by removing information that is supported by [[WP:RS|reliable]] and [[WP:V|verifiable]] sources. Lastly, per [[WP:V]], when reliable sources disagree with one another, the solution is not to remove the content and sources that disagree with your opinion and the sources you have. We have policies that actually directly prevent that from happening. [[User:Mkdw|<span style="font-size: 13px arial; color: #3366FF;">Mkdw</span>]][[User talk:Mkdw|<sup>''talk''</sup>]] 16:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
:I suggest you read [[Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth]], particularly the section titled "But I know the truth!" and "Editors are not truth finders". She's recognized in the [[India Book of Records]] as the youngest web designer. While other sources may show examples of others who are younger, it's not for us as editors to [[WP:SYNTH|synthesize]] the truth by removing information that is supported by [[WP:RS|reliable]] and [[WP:V|verifiable]] sources. Lastly, per [[WP:V]], when reliable sources disagree with one another, the solution is not to remove the content and sources that disagree with your opinion and the sources you have. We have policies that actually directly prevent that from happening. [[User:Mkdw|<span style="font-size: 13px arial; color: #3366FF;">Mkdw</span>]][[User talk:Mkdw|<sup>''talk''</sup>]] 16:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC) |
||
::Thanks! I was pretty sure you will revert the edits and will highlight the points like "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" etc again! Not pointing any fingers and not targeting you, let me make few general statements. I did go through the most useful and important page you mentioned. It makes sense too. Sorry but I suggest you to read that page again, it has nothing to do with the article we are debating on. Not related at all. There are people who are obsessed with rules and guidelines so much that they keep forgetting the most simple and basic thing - what Wikipedia is for! It is for giving '''correct and useful information''' to the public and not to help someone for '''shameless self promotion''', that also based on fake/false claims. Sad, but have no other options I know. As most of those are seniors and have super powers! No, no plans for edit wars. I am sure it will not be taken in the right sense and there is high probability that my account may get banned! Quite surprising and flawed logic anyway! As per that logic, earth is flat, Sun rotate around earth and ships shouldn't go too far as they may fell down! I mean, these were 'correct' at some point of time, even though science proved them all wrong later! The logic itself contradicts, it is pretty much like - Men's high jump world record is 2.0 m, which was on 18 May 1912. Though it became 2.45 mtrs on 27 July 1993! So the 'miracle kid' will remain as "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" forever even though I very clearly cited sources which are more official/reliable/verifiable/reputed resources which includes an Indian Government website! Sounds quite funny to me, to say the least! People are adamant on references like bogus sites and personal blogs. Let Wikipedia get flooded with articles like this - "The youngest kid who wrote an email using Gmail", The youngest kid who used XYZ software of the company ABC" and so on, as those are more important than letting people know what is the truth and what are false claims. --[[User:LVerina|LVerina]] ([[User talk:LVerina|talk]]) 16:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC) |
Revision as of 16:25, 1 April 2015
![]() | Biography Unassessed | ||||||
|
![]() | India: Kerala Start‑class Low‑importance ![]() | |||||||||||||||
|
|
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 90 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III when more than 3 sections are present. |
Recent attempts at deletion
This article has been very unpopular for many editors. It has been the subject of multiple Articles for Deletion nominations, edit wars, blanking and mass deletion of content, and vandalism. Most recently, in addition to a number of those things, an WP:SPI that ended up in a number of accounts and IPs blocked for sock puppetry. I'm always surprised that this article receives so much attention. I can only estimate and attribute this to a conflict in ideologies about notability and inclusion criteria here at the English Wikipedia. This article, for some reason, has become one of many battlegrounds. I've largely been the strongest proponent for this article both here at the talk page as well as the AFD discussions. I've done so because regardless of the prestige of the awards or credibility or claims to notability, the article and its subject clearly meet our guidelines for WP:GNG / WP:SIGCOV. The article has reliable and independent sources and has a history of verifiable. I'm not a direct supporter of this article; if I were creating a privately produced encyclopedia, I likely wouldn't include this article. I am, however, an editor of Wikipedia, and strongly believe in upholding its notability guidelines. They are not perfect, but it is not for us to pick and choose which subjects we want these policies to apply to and which we do not simply because we dislike the subject or topic. Reliable and independent sources cannot be discredited using rationales based upon original research by our editors, nor should an article be stripped down in an attempt to remove relevant content, in an attempt to downplay or minimize its presence under our guidelines. It is for these reasons that I have been here to defend this article from these things. Mkdwtalk 19:29, 19 March 2015 (UTC)
Surprise? Not exactly! On why this article is unpopular.
I have been following this article for quite long. I see the recent changes and only the 'expansion of the article' surprise me! Basically there are three types of users behind this article. One - editing/destructing it irresponsibly and doing vandalism. Second - Those who follow the 'rules of Wikipedia' and only those rules, so that the article will remain in Wikipedia as an example of how 'quantity wins over quality' sometimes. And third - those who have knowledge on the topic/field and think it is unpopular and of no use for the general public.
No harassment, pointing of fingers or personal attacks, but for me, it is quite surprising why people still believe this article is of any use for the public or whether the person mentioned in the article has any importance/relevance. The biggest strength of Wikipedia is same as the biggest weakness of Wikipedia, that is anyone can write on any topic in Wikipedia. A rocket scientist can write on medicine, a Doctor can write on sports and so on. Members of Wikipedia can write/manage an article, whether they have any clue on the field of that particular article doesn't matter. Sad to see such attempts wins sometimes and, this article is a perfect example of such a scenario.
Coming back to the particular article, I don't belongs to the vandalism group, so no plans to comment on it. That is bad and Wikipedia's policy of zero tolerance to vandalism is sure a good thing and effective. Now, regarding the third group mentioned above and number of deletion attempts in the democratic way. Those who really tried, spent a lot of time and effort on the article, checked a lot of things before coming to the conclusion that the article will not be any use to the normal Wikipedia users. Plus the main point in the article, that is 'The youngest web designer of the world' is not true and not recognized by any official body yet. All other things in the article are based on this point and the bubble bursts when the basic point itself is invalid.
I have (and many other members) explained it very well but let me give it a try again! With another example this time. Gmail is a product of google, for the purpose of email. They offer a huge space of 15GB for the users, for free. If users need more space than that, they can purchase additional space buy making payment. Google doesn't check anything, other than the payment status, to allot the space. Now, if some young person claim, that they are the youngest to use Gmail, almost all will brush it off considering it as a joke. And then if they purchase the additional space by making a payment and then claim something like - Google awarded me webspace - or - Google sent me an award (which is basically the receipt of the payment), the response from the people will be the same. But if some of the newspaper guys or general public is not aware of Gmail, or their monthly plans, can easily get confused on the claims. At this point, I believe it is the duty of good Wikipedia Samaritans to help them to clear the confusion and not to make it complicated! Doesn't sound complicated to me! In fact, a pretty simple and straight-forward thing.
Regarding the authenticity - Only a small number of the sources are of any good, like the newspapers and their online editions. Even they doesn't mention anywhere that which official body approved the claim of 'The youngest webdesigner of the world' except the bogus web site - Association of American Webmasters! An association without even having any contact information or physical, verifiable address! Every newspaper article starts with 'According to her parents...'
The sources - now I am really surprised to see the long list of sources! I can understand inclusion of newspaper links, but personal blogs and websites which anyone can create by paying few dollars for domain and webspace as Wikipedia sources? Examples - successstories.co.in (lists stories without checking authenticity, very similar to a personal blog), inspiringcitizen.com (blog of a couple), indiabookofrecords.in (not an official body but very similar to a blog by a small team led by one of the record holders!). It is quite easy to find thousands of such blogs or personal sites which has links and details of the 'miracle kid' mentioned in the article, but considering them as reliable sources for a Wikipedia article doesn't make sense.
We can create millions of such articles if quantity or number of articles in Wikipedia is our aim and not the quality or usefulness. Like the first user of any software product or the youngest user! It will flood the Wikipedia within minutes as there are millions of software companies and millions of products. As mentioned many times before by myself and many other members, if we blindly follow the rules and only them, it will not help the public. --LVerina (talk) 03:12, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
False claim - 'The youngest webdesigner of the world' - Bubble bursts, valid links to check
The whole article is based on a single, still not proved, claim that, the 'miracle kid' is the 'The youngest webdesigner of the world'. Please check the following links to see how the bubble bursts.
From the article page, one of the sources (which was approved by Mkdwtalk), reads - World's youngest Web designer "When I was studying in Class 3, my dad showed me a website designed by a young boy, Ajay Puri. He told me if I want, I can also design a website." Class 3, that is Grade 3, the girl is of the age 8 then. Now, google for 'Ajay Puri' and you can see valid, verifiable links which claims he started creating websites at the age of three and even Bill Gates, the then CEO of Microsoft congratulated him.
Links below
1. Hindustan Times, one of the leading newspapers in India - Ajay Puri - Designed his own website at age 3
2. Deccan Chronicle, another leading newspaper in India - Ajay became the youngest web designer
3. Press Information Bureau, Government of India, the most reliable source - Ajay Puri, the youngest web designer with the Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh
4. The New Indian Express, again, one of the leading newspapers in India - Cyberkid Ajay Puri, when he was less than three years old, had already designed his own website
5. The Tribune, another major newspaper in India - Puri was three years old when he created his website
6. Rediff.com, one of the leading news portals in India - The youngest 'Software Kid'/ Web designer in the world, at age three
7. His website, which has scanned copies of Indian newspapers/news magazines which includes The Hindu, Economics Time, Time of India etc (more than thirty links) - Scanned copies of Indian newspapers
8. His website, which has scanned copies of intentional newspapers/news magazines which includes Time Magazine, Khaleej Times etc (more than thirty links) - Scanned copies of International newspapers
Google and we will find a lot more. --LVerina (talk) 04:37, 29 March 2015 (UTC)
Youngest CEO - Not correct
It is not clear from any sources mentioned in the article page, that when did the 'miracle kid' become the CEO of a company. No details are available on her age when she became the CEO.
However, from her own website and from other sources - "The site, www.presentationhss.com was launched on 15-1-2006 by Sri. Binoy Viswom, Minister of Kerala, when she was only 8 years old and studying in 4th class."
From her official Facebook profile/page- "Born on February 5, 1998" and "Edesign Technologies (www.edesign.co.in) is my web designing company, started when I was 10 years old. "
Now, just doing a google search brought this.
Youngest CEO Harli Jordean - Youngest CEO Harli Jordean
I am sure there will be thousands of such CEOs under the age of 10, as age/qualification/knowledge is not a criteria for becoming a CEO in majority of the countries but just filling up some forms and paying the specified fee will do it.
Coming back to the article - It is quite shocking to see authors of Wikipedia to mention bogus/personal/blog sites as sources for titles like "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" etc without the reference to any official/reliable/verifiable/reputed resources like Guinness World Records as it is very clearly mentioned in World record page that "A world record is usually the best global performance ever recorded and officially verified". Not to offend, but I politely request the authors of the article to provide links of such official authorities when such records are mentioned - and not something like "According to her parents ..."
--LVerina (talk) 01:51, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- I suggest you read Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth, particularly the section titled "But I know the truth!" and "Editors are not truth finders". She's recognized in the India Book of Records as the youngest web designer. While other sources may show examples of others who are younger, it's not for us as editors to synthesize the truth by removing information that is supported by reliable and verifiable sources. Lastly, per WP:V, when reliable sources disagree with one another, the solution is not to remove the content and sources that disagree with your opinion and the sources you have. We have policies that actually directly prevent that from happening. Mkdwtalk 16:04, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks! I was pretty sure you will revert the edits and will highlight the points like "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" etc again! Not pointing any fingers and not targeting you, let me make few general statements. I did go through the most useful and important page you mentioned. It makes sense too. Sorry but I suggest you to read that page again, it has nothing to do with the article we are debating on. Not related at all. There are people who are obsessed with rules and guidelines so much that they keep forgetting the most simple and basic thing - what Wikipedia is for! It is for giving correct and useful information to the public and not to help someone for shameless self promotion, that also based on fake/false claims. Sad, but have no other options I know. As most of those are seniors and have super powers! No, no plans for edit wars. I am sure it will not be taken in the right sense and there is high probability that my account may get banned! Quite surprising and flawed logic anyway! As per that logic, earth is flat, Sun rotate around earth and ships shouldn't go too far as they may fell down! I mean, these were 'correct' at some point of time, even though science proved them all wrong later! The logic itself contradicts, it is pretty much like - Men's high jump world record is 2.0 m, which was on 18 May 1912. Though it became 2.45 mtrs on 27 July 1993! So the 'miracle kid' will remain as "Worlds youngest CEO", "The youngest webdesigner of the world" forever even though I very clearly cited sources which are more official/reliable/verifiable/reputed resources which includes an Indian Government website! Sounds quite funny to me, to say the least! People are adamant on references like bogus sites and personal blogs. Let Wikipedia get flooded with articles like this - "The youngest kid who wrote an email using Gmail", The youngest kid who used XYZ software of the company ABC" and so on, as those are more important than letting people know what is the truth and what are false claims. --LVerina (talk) 16:25, 1 April 2015 (UTC)